Ask the staffer
Jun 20, 2018, 6:18 am
#3166
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,990
Lots of delays into LGW today (not just BA). The GF is on a BA flight where a 45 to 60 minute delay was announced after everyone had boarded and due to "ATC restrictions". As quite a few flights into LGW around lunchtime are delayed is there a wider problem today with the airport or UK airspace?
Jun 20, 2018, 1:05 pm
#3167
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 387
There are widespread staff shortages in the ATC system, and not just in the UK. In the case of Gatwick traffic, en-route, Terminal Control area and approach and Gatwick tower are all suffering to a greater or lesser degree. It will probably get worse before it gets better such are the lengthy lead in times for new trainees.
Jun 20, 2018, 1:34 pm
#3168
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,146
There are widespread staff shortages in the ATC system, and not just in the UK. In the case of Gatwick traffic, en-route, Terminal Control area and approach and Gatwick tower are all suffering to a greater or lesser degree. It will probably get worse before it gets better such are the lengthy lead in times for new trainees.
Jun 20, 2018, 2:22 pm
#3169
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 387
It’s not a challenge getting the recruits, it’s the time it takes them to get through the training. Even with the college based side of the training severely truncated as it is now you’re talking significantly over two years probably at the busier units from walking in off the street to working solo on first validation.
Not helped that when they ramp up the recruitment, as is being done now, the college can turn out more bodies than the units are capable of training live so a backlog builds.
Current shortages, at least in one large U.K. ANSP, stem mostly from an ill thought through voluntary redundancy programme a few years ago, followed by greater numbers of normal and medical retirements than forecast and at the same time a significant reduction in recruitment.
At Gatwick tower, which is DFS now for the ATC contract, the rumours I’ve heard are that the NATS staff they hoped would transfer employment to them didn’t happen in the numbers anticipated and they’re now struggling to fill the vacant positions with suitable quality controllers from elsewhere.
Not helped that when they ramp up the recruitment, as is being done now, the college can turn out more bodies than the units are capable of training live so a backlog builds.
Current shortages, at least in one large U.K. ANSP, stem mostly from an ill thought through voluntary redundancy programme a few years ago, followed by greater numbers of normal and medical retirements than forecast and at the same time a significant reduction in recruitment.
At Gatwick tower, which is DFS now for the ATC contract, the rumours I’ve heard are that the NATS staff they hoped would transfer employment to them didn’t happen in the numbers anticipated and they’re now struggling to fill the vacant positions with suitable quality controllers from elsewhere.
Jun 21, 2018, 12:15 am
#3170
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,146
Thanks for that insight. I hadn't realised that Civ ATC had been fragmented, with different providers. That must make centralised manning/training even more challenging, as your last sentence highlights.
Jun 21, 2018, 1:24 am
#3171
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Programs: Mucci Blue, BAEC Gold, Blockbuster Video card
Posts: 1,378
Well presumably to a certain extent centralised regulation from the CAA can mitigate that, in the same way that the airlines all manage to operate slightly different SOPs and yet still have their pilots' core capabilities validated against a common set of standards (ie when training for and being issued their ATPLs). But I am sure it does throw up some extra challenges that wouldn't be there if there was one central agency.
Is the training indeed centralised for ATC? or do NATS and DFS run separate schemes?
Is the training indeed centralised for ATC? or do NATS and DFS run separate schemes?
Jun 21, 2018, 2:10 am
#3172
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 387
The ATC licence for all controllers is the same, these days it is a European licence (so who knows what is going to happen to it post brexit), but the college based training part for it can be done at any approved establishment. In theory anywhere in Europe.
NATS has its own training facility at Whitely, near Swanwick. DFS have their own place in Germany. I think there’s at least one other private training college in the U.K. Used to be a few but I know some have closed their doors over the years.
In the U.K. NATS has always been the largest employer and trainer of ab initio controllers. A restructuring a few years ago of how NATS conducts its training has however also contributed to the current shortage. Non NATS units used to be able to pick up a supply of former NATS trainees who had failed their NATS training, left NATS, but still had usable ratings so could be employed at a non NATS unit. The restructuring of the training means that supply has dried up. Then, a small number of NATS trainees also went through training with NATS and, as soon as qualified, resigned to go somewhere else. That has been stopped by current trainees being bonded.
There are are numerous employers of controllers in the U.K... NATS, DFS, local councils, the airfield owner etc. All have to follow the same licensing and basic operational regime but terms of service, pay etc will be different with each employer.
And although all the controllers have the same licence, the actual operational system is anything but joined up.
NATS has its own training facility at Whitely, near Swanwick. DFS have their own place in Germany. I think there’s at least one other private training college in the U.K. Used to be a few but I know some have closed their doors over the years.
In the U.K. NATS has always been the largest employer and trainer of ab initio controllers. A restructuring a few years ago of how NATS conducts its training has however also contributed to the current shortage. Non NATS units used to be able to pick up a supply of former NATS trainees who had failed their NATS training, left NATS, but still had usable ratings so could be employed at a non NATS unit. The restructuring of the training means that supply has dried up. Then, a small number of NATS trainees also went through training with NATS and, as soon as qualified, resigned to go somewhere else. That has been stopped by current trainees being bonded.
There are are numerous employers of controllers in the U.K... NATS, DFS, local councils, the airfield owner etc. All have to follow the same licensing and basic operational regime but terms of service, pay etc will be different with each employer.
And although all the controllers have the same licence, the actual operational system is anything but joined up.
Jun 21, 2018, 2:18 am
#3173
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 387
Oh, and the other daft situation is that RAF controllers leaving the service are not qualified to step straight into civil ATC. If an experienced RAF controller wants post service to become a civil controller in the U.K. they essentially have to go through the full civil training process. In the past some truncated courses have been run for ex military controllers, but that is the exception not the norm.
That is unlike in, say, the USA where civil and military controllers hold the same qualifications and skills are directly transferable.
That is unlike in, say, the USA where civil and military controllers hold the same qualifications and skills are directly transferable.
Last edited by Scott Pilgrim; Jun 21, 2018 at 2:26 am
Jun 21, 2018, 5:56 am
#3174
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,146
Oh, and the other daft situation is that RAF controllers leaving the service are not qualified to step straight into civil ATC. If an experienced RAF controller wants post service to become a civil controller in the U.K. they essentially have to go through the full civil training process. In the past some truncated courses have been run for ex military controllers, but that is the exception not the norm.
That is unlike in, say, the USA where civil and military controllers hold the same qualifications and skills are directly transferable.
That is unlike in, say, the USA where civil and military controllers hold the same qualifications and skills are directly transferable.
Jun 21, 2018, 6:07 am
#3175
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Programs: Mucci Blue, BAEC Gold, Blockbuster Video card
Posts: 1,378
Ok THAT seems like a strange situation, seeing as presumably they. wait for it, operate at times in shared airspace!!!!!!
Naturally I assume that the differences in OPs aren't huge, but equally I assume that at times they are also non negligible and hence the inability for ex mil to just sit back down in a civilian tower straight away.
You'd think there would be some sort of conversion course just like pilots changing type. Not zero, but hardly two years from basics either. Simply the 'differences'. Not as an exception, but as simple common sense (as if that has ever been the golden rule) ;-)
Naturally I assume that the differences in OPs aren't huge, but equally I assume that at times they are also non negligible and hence the inability for ex mil to just sit back down in a civilian tower straight away.
You'd think there would be some sort of conversion course just like pilots changing type. Not zero, but hardly two years from basics either. Simply the 'differences'. Not as an exception, but as simple common sense (as if that has ever been the golden rule) ;-)
Jun 21, 2018, 6:13 am
#3176
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,146
I believe using Mil rules provides more operational freedom of action. But I never worked in that policy area, so can't really make a positive statement!
Jun 21, 2018, 9:40 am
#3177
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: LHR Air Traffic Control
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 875
There are many reasons why the UK is short of civil ATCOs. Scott has mentioned a few.
One other main cause is that, traditionally, NATS would train its students in more than one rating: Tower and then Area or Tower and then Approach Radar. Those who did not pass the Area or Approach courses would often leave NATS and find employment at a non-NATS airport as a trainee ATCO (the alternative within NATS being an ATC assistant), them having just gained their student licence and Tower rating. Effectively, this meant many non-NATS airports were getting subsidised trainees. This arguably kept pay at these non-NATS airports relatively low as there was a ready stream of keen young ATCOs who had gained a Tower rating from NATS.
NATS changed this nearly ten years ago (Area controllers no longer do the Tower rating, so if they fail that course they don't have anything to fall back on), and the pool of this particular type of trainee (assistant with an unvalidated ATCO rating) has now been dry for a few years. Non-NATS airports are having to spend more to train their own assistants and pay has risen to entice (and retain) experienced ATCOs.
Another large factor in the staff shortage is the influence airlines have on ATC revenue. Over the past few years there has been a massive amount of pressure placed on the CAA by airlines to reduce the cost base of the en-route monopoly side of NATS, aka NERL (not helped by the fact that some airlines actually own a proportion of NATS and still want share dividends), hence the significant VR programme over the past few years. Indeed, in the last stakeholder consultation for NERL charges the airlines were warned of the cost v service provision balance, and were 'talked off the ledge' of going for the cheapest and less resilient option on the table. So it could be worse!
In the commercial airport ATC market, cost has become the main driver for many, if not all, ATC contracts, again due to the fact that many airlines are involved in the governance process of airport costs/charges.
Pension freedoms have also influenced many in their early to mid 50s to start looking to go earlier than expected. I'm doing all I can to be able to retire at 52 myself.
One other main cause is that, traditionally, NATS would train its students in more than one rating: Tower and then Area or Tower and then Approach Radar. Those who did not pass the Area or Approach courses would often leave NATS and find employment at a non-NATS airport as a trainee ATCO (the alternative within NATS being an ATC assistant), them having just gained their student licence and Tower rating. Effectively, this meant many non-NATS airports were getting subsidised trainees. This arguably kept pay at these non-NATS airports relatively low as there was a ready stream of keen young ATCOs who had gained a Tower rating from NATS.
NATS changed this nearly ten years ago (Area controllers no longer do the Tower rating, so if they fail that course they don't have anything to fall back on), and the pool of this particular type of trainee (assistant with an unvalidated ATCO rating) has now been dry for a few years. Non-NATS airports are having to spend more to train their own assistants and pay has risen to entice (and retain) experienced ATCOs.
Another large factor in the staff shortage is the influence airlines have on ATC revenue. Over the past few years there has been a massive amount of pressure placed on the CAA by airlines to reduce the cost base of the en-route monopoly side of NATS, aka NERL (not helped by the fact that some airlines actually own a proportion of NATS and still want share dividends), hence the significant VR programme over the past few years. Indeed, in the last stakeholder consultation for NERL charges the airlines were warned of the cost v service provision balance, and were 'talked off the ledge' of going for the cheapest and less resilient option on the table. So it could be worse!
In the commercial airport ATC market, cost has become the main driver for many, if not all, ATC contracts, again due to the fact that many airlines are involved in the governance process of airport costs/charges.
Pension freedoms have also influenced many in their early to mid 50s to start looking to go earlier than expected. I'm doing all I can to be able to retire at 52 myself.
Last edited by Heathrow Tower; Jun 21, 2018 at 9:52 am
Jun 21, 2018, 10:03 am
#3178
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,146
It’s an interesting contrast to Mil ATCO careers, where we worked through everything! A couple of 2 1/2 year tours on Airfields, doing Tower, Director, Talkdown and Approach and hopefully Supervisor ... then Area training to do general Area duties including Centralised Approach Control for a number of airfields, and again hopefully Supervisor. I think I ticked all the boxes over the first 10 years at 4 different Units, including LATCC in the joint Civ/Mil Ops Room where we nursed Mil jet traffic through the web of airways over Southeast England.
The endless variety (yes, and the On Job Training associated with it!) gave us a wide skill-set. Perhaps not as specifically focussed as Civil ATC, doing the same thing all the time, but fitting us hopefully to eventually do anything, anywhere. And that was/is, of course, the Military requirement when operational overseas deployments are now the norm for many.
But then it’s horses for courses. I couldn’t contemplate spending my career doing the same task at the same unit, year in and year out, regardless of pay scales
The endless variety (yes, and the On Job Training associated with it!) gave us a wide skill-set. Perhaps not as specifically focussed as Civil ATC, doing the same thing all the time, but fitting us hopefully to eventually do anything, anywhere. And that was/is, of course, the Military requirement when operational overseas deployments are now the norm for many.
But then it’s horses for courses. I couldn’t contemplate spending my career doing the same task at the same unit, year in and year out, regardless of pay scales
Jun 21, 2018, 11:02 am
#3179
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 387
There are many reasons why the UK is short of civil ATCOs. Scott has mentioned a few.
One other main cause is that, traditionally, NATS would train its students in more than one rating: Tower and then Area or Tower and then Approach Radar. Those who did not pass the Area or Approach courses would often leave NATS and find employment at a non-NATS airport as a trainee ATCO (the alternative within NATS being an ATC assistant), them having just gained their student licence and Tower rating. Effectively, this meant many non-NATS airports were getting subsidised trainees. This arguably kept pay at these non-NATS airports relatively low as there was a ready stream of keen young ATCOs who had gained a Tower rating from NATS.
NATS changed this nearly ten years ago (Area controllers no longer do the Tower rating, so if they fail that course they don't have anything to fall back on), and the pool of this particular type of trainee (assistant with an unvalidated ATCO rating) has now been dry for a few years. Non-NATS airports are having to spend more to train their own assistants and pay has risen to entice (and retain) experienced ATCOs.
In the commercial airport ATC market, cost has become the main driver for many, if not all, ATC contracts, again due to the fact that many airlines are involved in the governance process of airport costs/charges.
One other main cause is that, traditionally, NATS would train its students in more than one rating: Tower and then Area or Tower and then Approach Radar. Those who did not pass the Area or Approach courses would often leave NATS and find employment at a non-NATS airport as a trainee ATCO (the alternative within NATS being an ATC assistant), them having just gained their student licence and Tower rating. Effectively, this meant many non-NATS airports were getting subsidised trainees. This arguably kept pay at these non-NATS airports relatively low as there was a ready stream of keen young ATCOs who had gained a Tower rating from NATS.
NATS changed this nearly ten years ago (Area controllers no longer do the Tower rating, so if they fail that course they don't have anything to fall back on), and the pool of this particular type of trainee (assistant with an unvalidated ATCO rating) has now been dry for a few years. Non-NATS airports are having to spend more to train their own assistants and pay has risen to entice (and retain) experienced ATCOs.
In the commercial airport ATC market, cost has become the main driver for many, if not all, ATC contracts, again due to the fact that many airlines are involved in the governance process of airport costs/charges.
Jun 21, 2018, 11:07 am
#3180
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 387
It’s an interesting contrast to Mil ATCO careers, where we worked through everything! A couple of 2 1/2 year tours on Airfields, doing Tower, Director, Talkdown and Approach and hopefully Supervisor ... then Area training to do general Area duties including Centralised Approach Control for a number of airfields, and again hopefully Supervisor. I think I ticked all the boxes over the first 10 years at 4 different Units, including LATCC in the joint Civ/Mil Ops Room where we nursed Mil jet traffic through the web of airways over Southeast England.
The endless variety (yes, and the On Job Training associated with it!) gave us a wide skill-set. Perhaps not as specifically focussed as Civil ATC, doing the same thing all the time, but fitting us hopefully to eventually do anything, anywhere. And that was/is, of course, the Military requirement when operational overseas deployments are now the norm for many.
But then it’s horses for courses. I couldn’t contemplate spending my career doing the same task at the same unit, year in and year out, regardless of pay scales
The endless variety (yes, and the On Job Training associated with it!) gave us a wide skill-set. Perhaps not as specifically focussed as Civil ATC, doing the same thing all the time, but fitting us hopefully to eventually do anything, anywhere. And that was/is, of course, the Military requirement when operational overseas deployments are now the norm for many.
But then it’s horses for courses. I couldn’t contemplate spending my career doing the same task at the same unit, year in and year out, regardless of pay scales
There was a time when NATS trainees did the then full set... aerodrome, approach, approach radar, area and area radar before being posted to their operational unit. Back then the trainees also did a full private pilots licence and also spent a period of time with an airline, BA as it happens.
Some would argue that that long course, interspersed within it with periods spent at a selection of operational units, along with the flying training and airline experience produced a very well rounded and competent trainee. Others argued it cost too much and was unnecessary.
The cost argument won out.